You can watch the entire discussion here.

Also tomorrow, at 7pm on Substack, Virginia parents Todd Truitt, Jaime Osborne, and I will talk about the issues raised in this recent article, not just in VA but nationally. The basic idea that it’s hard to think critically if you don’t have content to think critically about remains stubbornly resisted. If you follow VA education debates you’ll know that E.D. Hirsch sort of personifies the idea that no one is a prophet in their own land. And we’ll take your questions. That’s 7pm via Substack.

I’ll be at ASU+GSV next week, Rick Hess and Penny Schwinn will tell me why I am wrong about everything on Tuesday morning at a breakfast session. I’ll be talking transparency, accountability, and quality with MetaMetrics. And at a few other events. Reach out and we can try to connect.

I’ll be at UVA on 4/20 interviewing Amber Northern about federal education research and her IES recommendations. At Harvard IOP later that week.

ICYMI, on Monday Kristen Huff, of Curriculum Associates, Lesley Muldoon of the National Assessment Governing Board, and Zachary Warner of the New York State Education Department stopped by a BW LinkedIn Live to talk about different sources of assessment data and what they can and can’t do – and how they work together and need each other. This event was sponsored by Curriculum Associates. If you’re interested in becoming a future sponsor let me know.

Last week I wrote about how many things kids experience today, weed, porn, gambling, or social media, are not new, but are more intense.

Jed Wallace and I talked AI with Marissa Mission and Mary Wells from Bellwether.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Coming Storms

If you’re someone who thinks that history doesn’t necessarily repeat but does rhyme (often wrongly attributed to Twain), then this new book, The Coming Storm, by Odd Arne Westad is worth your time. Westad looks at the parallels between the evolving world order now and the run up to the world wars. It’s not just our domestic politics that have a late 19th-Century feel to them.

This Politico article on whether Iran is going to be a Suez moment for the United States is also worth checking out.

Here at home Chad Aldeman looks at the shifting demographic burden from young to old — it’s showing up in budgets. This issue, which I’ve casually called The Geezer War*, doesn’t get the attention it should in discussions of education finance. Aging population, shifting population patterns, declining enrollment is a tall order for schools to navigate.

Rahm Emanuel sat down with the Fifth Column podcast. I have no idea if Emanuel can catch on with a Democratic primary electorate that sometimes flirts with near politically suicidal tendencies. But it’s a compelling interview and he’s raising some important issues – including very much on education where he’s asking the party to get over a seriousness threshold. Basically, voters don’t tend to vote education issues specifically at the national level but they do help frame a candidate. Think Bill Clinton as a “new” Democrat with charter schools and accountability, George W. Bush as a compassionate conservative. Even Obama to some extent on reform. Those frames matter to voters, more than the specifics.

Dems don’t lose because they’re not serious on education questions, but rather because voters assume if you’re not serious then you’re also not going to be serious on a bunch of other things. That’s why the “they/them” ads were so politically devastating.

Emanuel isn’t the only Dem talking like this, here’s Arne Duncan recently, for instance:

“We don’t have goals. We don’t have strategies to achieve them. We don’t have metrics to measure them, and we don’t have public transparency,” Duncan said. “We’re lost, and we’ve broken trust with parents, and so I feel, again, a moral and educational obligation to try and help more.”

That about covers it. But Emanuel is the only one so far in the presidential conversation making the same points. Hopefully that creates some space for a more vigorous debate.

Also on education politics, a question I am wondering about, and if you have an answer, reach out. Donald Trump, McDonalds-eater, bullet-dodger, civilization-ender — and current U.S. President talks about a lot of things. A lot. Total almost non-stop free association with this one. In our part of the world his 2025 tax bill created a landmark school choice program in the country that a year or two from now will probably be the largest federal education program. It’ll also probably be pretty popular if polling is any indication. Yet he doesn’t talk about that? Not in speeches. Not on social media. Apparently not in private. Why is that? It seems like a no-brainer and it’s a lot more popular than $4/gallon gas or hours long TSA lines. You wouldn’t be able to get a normal U.S. President to shut up about it. Yet here we are. Why?

How I Use AI

A bit of a dust-up has broken out about how people are using AI in writing. Good a time as any to briefly discuss how I use it, and don’t, around here. I don’t use to write or generate ideas (my ideas file doesn’t need any juicing from AI, it’s too long as it is). I don’t see any point in using it to write. But I do use it to edit. It’s a very good proofreader when prompted well. It’s a pretty good editor with good prompts for feedback. But I’ve learned the hard way (it changed a number in a consequential way a while ago) to monitor all suggested edits. I also use it to catch notes for me to use later. But human eyes last and human input first.

And if you think emm dashes are a good tell that I or someone is using it, well…I went back and looked at my TIME columns, all pre-AI, and I was averaging a little more than two per column across more than 100. So I do like an emm dash and am not going to let the robots take that from me – at least not yet.

*You could do worse for a name for a 70+ metal band.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

But first, readers, it’s been a few. Lots of work projects have kept me busy, some outfacing, some not. Reach out if you want to learn more. I’ll be in-person at ASU+GSV in April, as well as at Harvard, and in Charlottesville, where I’ll be interviewing Amber Northern about her IES report on 4/20 in Bavarro Hall at UVA.

Online, you can find me at this discussion about competing sources student achievement data Bellwether is hosting on 4/6 in a webinar sponsored by Curriculum Associates.

Todd Truitt, Jaime Osborne, and I will talk about the issues raised in this article, not just in VA but nationally. That’s 7pm on the 9th via Substack.

April 29th, 1:30pm ET, I’ll be doing an exit interview with Sonja Santelises who is wrapping up a remarkable run leading the Baltimore Public Schools. That’s sponsored by Bellwether and The 74.

New WonkyFolk this week. Jed Wallace and I sat down with my colleagues Mary Wells and Marissa Mission to talk AI. You’ll see some disagreement even among people on the same team at Bellwether, reflecting the velocity of what’s happening with AI, in schools and in general. I’d beware of anyone with real certainty about how this all goes.

You can listen here on this player, or wherever you get your podcasts at Apple or Spotify. Or watch/listen on YouTube:

I also talked with the Perkins Platform podcast about AI earlier this month with Columbia’s Brian Perkins. We got into the idea in this article, AI is like Covid, those in the know are thinking about what to expect, those who are not are about to be blindsided.

If you want to get your A250 on, Louise Dube of iCivics and I talked about state standards for civics and history, the messiness and why they matter.  Spotify and Apple Podcasts.  It’s on YouTube as well, here:

And ICYMI Jed and I went deep on WonkyFolk last month with Lisa Graham Keegan about a range of issues and why she’s still in the fight for better quality for kids.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

The Intensity Is Different

Hard to miss the backlash against tech that’s been brewing — court cases, parent pushback, and a mashup of concerns about social media, ed tech, and AI. You don’t have to be all-in on that to be concerned about some of what’s happening, both the backlash and some of what’s on offer for kids. I regularly recommend Julia Freeland-Fisher on AI and relationships, for instance.

At the same time, the McKay Coppins Atlantic article about his foray into sports betting is rightfully getting a lot of attention and might be a better jumping-off point. The magazine staked Coppins $10k to try sports betting and — well, read it. The short version: the distance from church-going family man to having to use a state’s self-exclusion list to curb a gambling habit is shorter than you might think.

No small part of that is because many of us came of age in an era where sweating a bet meant waiting for an event to play out, then betting again sometime later. In today’s attention economy, you don’t have to do that. Sweat a bet? For what, one play? Online platforms offer AI-generated in-game bets and constant prop bets, so you can always be in action — on obscure or even previously unbettable sports, around the clock. The closest you used to get to that was a casino or a racetrack, and even then it wasn’t as intense.

This is why when you hear people say, of young people increasingly betting on sports, “oh, we’ve always done that” — it’s worth pausing. Yes, we have. But at nothing near this level of intensity and access. You have a casino and sportsbook in your pocket.

The same is true of some other vices, temptations, and activities facing young people. Porn is an obvious one. When I was growing up, porn was a purloined Playboy before a Little League game — a more explicit magazine if you were really lucky. Everyone knew whose dad had a stash, and we all wanted sleepovers at that kid’s house. (Playboy even published interviews with world leaders — look it up.)

Today? Algorithm-driven platforms are exposing young people to all kinds of content, including loads of fetish material. Hide the stepsisters. Fine for adults who choose it; not great for young people. Don’t kid yourself — porn is the default sex-ed curriculum now, which is unhealthy and should especially worry parents of girls, though it’s not good for boys either. With a VPN, a kid has a porn studio in their pocket. Exact numbers are hard to come by, but even directionally, a lot of kids are looking at porn — and young kids at that. Multiple studies put first exposure before kids are even teenagers.

And weed. Today’s weed is not like the mellow stuff that made music and other things a bit more sensory — maybe at most got you a little too stoned, but basically you put on the Allman Brothers and relaxed. That kind of thing. The legendary really good weed? It’s everywhere now. That’s not perception or selective memory. THC content has been increasing , and that has real consequences, especially for young people’s mental health. Not surprisingly, ER visits for young people related to cannabis are on the rise.

Locking people up for weed was problematic policy in several ways, but we jumped pretty quickly from “let’s not do that” to — with apologies to Bob for the misappropriation — everybody must get stoned. Talk to school administrators or ER staff and you get a sense of the change.

And of course smartphones and addictive social media — and soon, AI. You don’t even have to go full Haidt to see the problems. Sure, kids have talked on phones since we’ve had phones and party lines. But the intensity of today’s apps, their addictive design, and their intrusiveness is a lot different from three-way calling. Not surprisingly, countries are trying to ban them and politicians here are taking a hard look — and raising the alarm. (This is a problem for ed tech, something easier to regulate than what kids do out of school.)

Look, life’s short; do what makes you happy. In my view these are all activities that should be available to consenting adults. An afternoon at the racetrack is a happy place for me, for example. I used to play cards a lot. My wife and I have a side hustle in the bar business. I’m not interested in bans or vice policing or kink shaming. I think many of the proposed reforms are problematic on First Amendment grounds even if they’re aimed at real potential harms.

But we do need to talk about these things when it comes to young people, especially during their development, because the level of intensity of what they are doing has changed dramatically under our noses. That’s not gauzy nostalgia — there is real evidence. If you’re content that it’s all cool, every generation navigated the same vices, then you’re missing the intensity shift. We’re looking at more than a slightly modernized version of what kids have always done. And as the Coppins article makes clear, we should probably talk more openly about the impact and risks and make sure people really understand what they — and especially their kids — are getting into.

Right now, it seems we are failing at both. With real consequences for young people.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Next Friday Ed Week and HMH hosting a discussion about teaching and learning in the AI-era. Jack Lynch will moderate a conversation with Jean-Claude Brizard, Francie Alexander, and me.

New WonkyFolk. Jed and I talk with Colorado’s Parker Baxter who has evaluated reforms in Denver for a while. Denver is a weird mix of substantial gains and then also a surprising amount of indifference – not only from critics but from within the reform community.

You can listen on Spotify or on Apple, or wherever you get podcasts.

Let’s Read.

If you’re reading this, I suspect I don’t have to tell you about the importance of literacy to life success. As I noted in a pre-pandemic column for The 74,

But if we’re being honest, we’ve gotten reading wrong for a long time, in a lot of different ways. The Science of Reading isn’t all new; in some cases, it’s half-century-old research that struggled to gain traction in an education sector dominated by romantic ideas and adult politics. For a while, we coded reading instruction methods as Republican or Democratic. We still debate how much content and knowledge matter—even though they matter a lot to literacy. (James Traub’s new book is important on this point, as well as more generally.)

Politically, right now, Democrats have a predicate problem. You often have to embrace the predicate of an argument to drive a point home politically. For instance:

Yes, crime and disorder are a problem, but sending the National Guard into American cities is not the way to solve it.

Yes, immigration at the southern border was too unchecked, but what ICE is doing now violates our laws and customs and is profoundly un-American.

Yes, sports and safe private spaces for women are special cases, but transgender people in the United States should be able to live free from discrimination and harassment.

Yes, parents should have choices about where they send their kids to school, but we also need real accountability for all schools receiving public money.

The problem is obvious. The italicized parts of those statements are party-splitters for Democrats right now. They get you labeled racist, xenophobic, transphobic, or—in our part of the world—a “privatizer,” which for education activists might even be worse than any of the other labels.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

But here’s one that is not a party-splitter:

We need to make sure reading is taught according to the best available evidence and do far more to support teachers and schools in helping students become effective readers.

No italics.

In fact, the part of that statement that is a party-splitter is the part about resources. And it doesn’t split the Dems; it splits the Rs.

Democrats have more or less handed the reading issue to Republicans. The party killed George Bush’s billion-dollar reading program—which was Science of Reading—in a fit of political pique. And then, unless you believe that proximity to the Gulf of Mexico is linked to reading achievement, Democrats largely stood idly by as a set of Republican governors got serious about evidence-based instruction, high-quality materials, and support for teachers. Jared Polis (CO) has a good education story to tell. Gretchen Whitmer (MI) does too, to some extent, though she seems disinclined to run. Wes Moore brought the state chief who led Mississippi’s reading gains to Maryland, but he’s hamstrung by a budget mess. But most Democratic governors had better hope attention is focused elsewhere. Most Republicans, too—though some can lay claim to impressive work around reading and instructional materials, or at least hop into that slipstream.

Enter Rahm Emanuel. The former Democratic congressman, mayor, and White House chief of staff is out there, loudly talking about reading. And why not? The issue is sitting in plain sight. The Democratic play is obvious. And the lane is open.

By setting an ambitious goal on reading achievement, Democrats can get on the right side of the outcomes and achievement debate. Every kid should be reading early. We should support adolescent literacy for students who are still struggling, especially post-pandemic. We should pay more attention to reading and students with disabilities. It’s a big idea, it’s attainable, and it resonates—especially with parents of kids with special needs, boys, struggling readers, and parents more generally. And by getting on the right side of the resources argument—we need to support schools and teachers in doing this—Democrats can differentiate. Bonus: It doesn’t make you sound weird to the average parent and create a negative frame in the way that championing things like “equity grading” or deemphasizing math does.

I’m not suggesting this is the only issue Democrats should run on in 2028. Trump is handing Democrats big openings on civil liberties, foreign policy, and—of course—prices and affordability. Nor am I suggesting a national election will turn on education. That’s unlikely. But as we’ve discussed before, education issues can help frame a candidate’s larger case: Bill Clinton and charters as a “New” Democrat; George Bush and compassionate conservatism, signaling he wasn’t Newt Gingrich; Obama and education reform. Or, conversely, the devastating effect of the “they’re for they/them, and I’m for you” line of attack.

Set a bold goal for national literacy and then get to work. The politics and the policy line up. Bill Clinton once noted that if you do good policy, good politics will follow. It’s advice that still applies, even in these upside-down political times.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Tomorrow, Wednesday, join Bellwether at 12p ET for a LinkedIn Live conversation with insiders from NAGB and outside experts to discuss what’s happening on NAEP, why 12th-grade NAEP matters more than you might think, and why learning recovery still must be a front and center issue.

I’m doing a fireside chat at UVA the afternoon of January 26th in Bavarro Hall, would be great to see you there if you’re in the Charlottesville area. On the 30th I’m doing an Education Week webinar with HMH CEO Jack Lynch where we will discuss whether run prevention will be enough for the Red Sox to make the playoffs this year. (…it’s about AI and an interesting line-up, Jean-Claude Brizzard and Francine Alexander, I hope you can join).

ICYMI – a few things to watch in 2026. MLK on our rendezvous with chaos.

Breaking: Already under reelection pressure, well-regarded Senator Bill Cassidy (R) who chairs the senate committee that handles education officially has a Trump-endorsed primary challenger. This will impact education politics and policy.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Wadin’ through the waste stormy winter

Let’s start with the high note. I came of age in the Mary Sue Terry and Douglas Wilder era of Virginia politics. Robert Frye, the first Black school board chair in Fairfax County, lived a few houses down from me. That first might not seem like a big deal now, but it was at the time. Abigail Spanberger becoming governor of Virginia this past weekend is another important—albeit, in my view, long overdue—first. It’s good to see. She’s going to have her hands full, though. Her pick for State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jenna Conway, is a fantastic choice, serious talent.

Earlier this month, on his way out the door at the end of this term (Virginia governors only serve one), outgoing Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin (R) announced that Virginia would participate in the new K-12 education tax credit program included in last year’s tax bill—the “OB3,” or whatever you want to call it bill. On the one hand, the Virginia announcement was a little premature. The regulations for the new program (which we just talked about) aren’t done, and there are potential moving parts. On the other hand, Youngkin is a private citizen again, and he was in a hurry at the end of his term.

People predictably fell apart.

Let’s stipulate we probably won’t see the same reaction if Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D), who also said his state will participate, ends up as the Democratic nominee in 2028. Or if other blue state governors get int. Former Obama Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and former Democratic mayor Jorge Elorza have urged Blue states to participate. I’m not saying it’s a great policy you should embrace. I am suggesting you evaluate it on its merits rather than let partisanship rot your brain. There is a lot going on here around it.

Here’s a quick primer on the program with a very good set of FAQs and information about the basic structure if you want to learn more.

Premature Chadulation: You should always read Chad Aldeman, and he has a take on this Virginia move. But I think he’s too early. We don’t know exactly what the program looks like yet! And the Youngkin submission might be binding under some interpretations. It might not. It’s messy!

So let’s talk about the politics for a minute, because they’re interesting. These scholarships are cleverly designed, so what’s happening in Virginia has relevance elsewhere (and I’m not just saying that to encourage you to keep reading). I should note Iowa is also already in.

For Youngkin, the politics are straightforward. He gets a school choice talking point and a feather in his cap with the base. A knock on him on the political right is that he didn’t do enough on school choice while in office. I don’t think that’s entirely fair. Virginia’s constitution limits most kinds of school choice. A powerful entrenched education establishment, regulatory capture, and somewhat self-satisfied education culture limit things even more*. The votes were never there in the state legislature. He could only do so much.

Youngkin did open partnership lab schools around the state (I was involved in that effort), where public school districts (we call them divisions) and colleges and universities open public schools around specific focus areas. There are now schools focused on shipbuilding, health trades, data work, and aerospace, for instance. That’s a pretty middle-of-the-road idea that would barely occasion mention in a state like Colorado, or even New York or Massachusetts. And still, the fight over it was hammer and tongs the whole way. Regardless, fair or not, some folks on the right think Youngkin disappointed them on this front.

So getting Virginia into this new program early is all upside for Youngkin. He can say he worked to expand choice until his very last days in office. Whether as a legacy item or for a possible future run for public office, that’s a good talking point!

But Virginia has a new governor as of this weekend: Abigail Spanberger (D). She won in a romp in November in an election that didn’t have a lot to do with education. The conventional wisdom says Youngkin’s move puts her in a box. I think that’s wrong. I’m sure this wasn’t Youngkin’s intent, but the move arguably gives Spanberger optionality where she didn’t have it. Politicians love optionality.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

And her politics are more complicated.

If the decision on whether to participate had simply fallen to Spanberger, she would have faced cross-pressures between the teachers unions and education establishment, they loathe this program, and the prospect of explaining why Virginia would leave a lot of federal education money on the table. That’s an unappealing choice for Democratic governors and a real wedge. Again, like it or not, this is a clever program.

In Virginia, there are many wealthy taxpayers who can participate in the education tax credit program and claim the tax credit. National estimates range from 120 million to almost 140 million taxpayers. Virginia has plenty of those high earners. It will be awkward to explain why they are giving for tax credits to support education initiatives in other states.

Youngkin also created a political headache for Spanberger by listing a tentatively approved set of scholarship-granting organizations in Virginia. So this isn’t just abstract money flowing to other states. It will be easy to communicate what’s being left on the table for kids right here in Virginia. And just like national Dems went into overdrive to scuff up Youngkin wherever they could and dim his chances as a rising political star, national Rs will now try to do the same thing to Spanberger and this will be a target. I’d expect ads if she elects to forgo this program.

Beyond Virginia, keep an eye on how these politics evolve nationwide as the scholarships move from abstract idea to actual education initiatives in specific places.

For Spanberger, simply opting out could become a 2028 liability, depending on how the program plays out. When some Democratic governors opt in, those who opt out will need a better explanation than “Trump sucks.” One lesson Democrats still haven’t absorbed on education: people are deeply pragmatic when it comes to their own kids. Governors who opt out had better point to an education policy agenda so robust around genuine school improvement that it offsets the politics. “We didn’t do X because we are doing Y” can work—but only if Y isn’t the same old weak soup. There is an argument to be made around accountability.

In any event, this no longer presents a simple opt-in-or-opt-out argument in Virginia, because Youngkin just handed Spanberger several process-based options to push back. She could challenge the federal government on whether Virginia’s action was even legal, given that the regulations aren’t in place. People disagree about how binding these commitments are before the rules are finalized. It’s messy, and a lawsuit is possible.

She could also argue within Virginia that the timing was premature because the regulations aren’t final, and muddy the issue that way as Chad suggests. She could argue for pulling back once the regulations are final. The program puts the decision with governors, but legislatures could still get involved. The Attorney General could decide to get involved. A lot of plays.

Conversely, she could say the decision wasn’t hers, that Virginia is now obligated, and simply move forward. She could agree that Virginia is bound for 2027 and revisit the issue for 2028—when the political mood around the program may look different for any number of reasons, including other Trump administration actions or high-profile problems as the program is implemented. This could turn into an intramural squabble rather than blue on red.

I don’t know what she’ll do. But I do know this move expanded her options a lot more than it tied her hands. And as Democrats try to find their way with this program, that’s worth watching.

*You’d think a state with Virgina’s politics and demographics (and avowed commitment to equity) and where more than half of Black students, low-income, and Hispanic students are below basic on the NAEP at key milestones, so functionally unprepared for work, college, or the military, that there would be a fierce urgency to improve. You’d be wrong!

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Modern man is presently having a rendezvous with chaos, not merely because of human badness, but also because of human stupidity. If Western civilization continues to degenerate until it, like twenty-four of its predecessors, falls hopelessly into a bottomless void, the cause will be not only its undeniable sinfulness, but also its appalling blindness. And if American democracy gradually disintegrates it will be due as much to a lack of insight as to a lack of commitment to right.

– MLK, Love in Action. 1963.

First, ICYMI – 2026 Eduwonk In and Out list here. Holiday books list here if you still want reading ideas. Bonus one that didn’t make the list, still reading, is Hotshot: A Life on Fire. If you enjoyed books like Educated or Welcome to the Goddamn Ice Cube, both on the 2018 list, then you might like this.

2026 Eduwonk word of the year: Variance. Expect variance across the board, high variance. In education we’re embracing variance with ideas like ESAs or more flexibility for states around federal dollars and rules. That will work out well in some places, not so well in others. You might not like RFK’s vaccine policies, but the new food pyramid is pretty good and a rebuke to industry food lobbying many thought they’d never see. Expect high variance across the board at such a transitory time.

The 2026 midterms won’t be about education. Midterms generally are a referendum on the incumbent and, more recently, structural issues around polarization and redistricting. But expect education to emerge in the 2028 national conversation among Democrats. Smart Dems know the party’s interest-group-driven approach is a liability; expect new ideas. Rahm Emanuel is an early mover here, but keep an eye out for others.

A country can have a low birthrate, low rates of immigration, but it can’t have both and remain economically robust (personally, I’m for rejecting the choice and embracing both family-encouraging policies and robust managed immigration). But the current approach we’re taking by default and active choice has all sorts of economic implications. It also matters for schools. Fewer kids along with more parents frustrated and choosing alternatives to the public schools and pre-existing financial pressure = Not great! Expect more attention to consolidation, closures, and tough decisions that matter to the future of the public education sector (this will also affect the for-and non-profit sectors in education as well, contact me if you want to learn more about BW’s M&A work).

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Ed tech will continue to emerge as a flashpoint. The debate about AI, technology, and kids is not going to break cleanly left/right or red/blue. Australia’s play—a social media ban for young people—is being watched and proposed here.

Bill Gates thinks AI will supplant teachers. I wouldn’t bet on it. That prediction is likely to join the pile of similar ones by everyone from Thomas Edison to Hyman Rickover and Steve Jobs. The realization that AI might matter more to administration, management, and support than to actual instruction seems to be growing. Watch that space. The use cases—special education paperwork, assistants for teachers, efficiency and data—are compelling. More compelling than the idea that Sam Altman will just teach the kids. One proof point for this? Ed tech 1.0 and how it impacted the sector in ways outside the classroom.

You can check out BW’s work on AI here.

Civics will be a 2026 flashpoint. It’s A250, and President Trump plans to celebrate it as the founders almost certainly envisioned, with MMA fights and other neo-Roman gladiatorial spectacles, nationalism, divisive and coercive issues, and the like…. Civics is pretty divisive in K–12 schools, with too many folks who think schools aren’t doing their job if they don’t produce little proto-revolutionaries or, conversely, reflexive nationalists.

WCAG. Based on my surveying of industry leaders and state officials, you probably haven’t heard of WCAG. You will. It’s a set of regulations around web accessibility for people with vision needs. Sensible stuff to ensure access, and that matters in public sector activities—including education—where broad access is essential. New rules go into effect this spring. States are all over the place on compliance. How the new regulations will be enforced is something of an open question as well. On the one hand, the division at the Department of Justice that oversees it is now mostly a ghost town, and remaining staff are focused elsewhere (and at the White House the Trump team is trying to get rid of ASL interpreters, so this is not exactly a pro-accommodations crowd). There is also, however, the possibility of frivolous lawsuits that could discredit the new regulations. Colorado offers an example of a productive enforcement model. Sleeper issue to keep an eye on.

Trump tuition scholarships. The Trump tuition scholarships that were included in last year’s tax bill are a devilishly clever policy that will have the dual effect of supporting more school choice while splitting Democrats. It’s a dollar for dollar $1700 tax credit regardless of whether the state where you live participates. If Democrat-led states, which often have more affluent taxpayers, opt in, then leaders there piss off teachers’ unions and other adult groups. If they don’t participate, then they have to explain why they are leaving what could be a lot of money on the table. Already, Dem governors are staking out different positions, and there is a testy debate behind the scenes about the best path forward. And the policy isn’t even finalized yet! Regs come later this year. At issue is how broad usage of the funds will be and how much scholarship-granting organizations could fund public school-facing activities.

Here’s the thing: This is more like casino gambling than an education policy in terms of policy diffusion. You have a lot of governors who don’t love gambling, but like their citizens putting tax dollars in the coffers of neighboring states even less. Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell notably gave voice to this sentiment. The tax credit policy seems likely to spread because it will be hard to stay out over time (just as we’ve seen with gambling), especially if the regs allow programs that benefit public school students.

Did you think the religious charter school issue was dead after the Supreme Court deadlocked 4–4? Nope. The stakes are too high. Keep an eye on this TN case, and there will be more.

It’ll be a challenging year. Wishing you well.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

ICYMI – the holiday book list, books that are good all year long, is here.

Happy New Year.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Jed and I did a holiday–themed WonkyFolk, but he’s a grinch. Seriously. He showed up with an Elf on the Shelf. We covered a lot of ground, 2025 reactions, tech and cell phones, Rod Paige, and why education conversations are so stunted.

You can listen or read here, and see the notes, or wherever you get podcasts.

Or watch here:

New Dominion?

On Tuesday Virginia’s non-partisan legislative analysis body, JLARC, released its look at the new school accountability system. Important to policymaking in VA. Not going to belabor that here, it’s the holidays. But, some quick reax here and here.

Holiday books.

Which brings us to….it’s that time of year again. Here are some books I read in 2024 that stuck with me — useful, provocative, or just enjoyable. No themes except worth your time and good for a gift. Not too late to shop for Christmas. Past years here for more ideas.

First, on education:

The Future of Tutoring — Liz Cohen

Cohen takes what was, at least until Trump stormed back on the scene and AI exploded, the biggest intervention/fad/issue in education and actually explains what works, what doesn’t, and why. If you want to cut through the hype, the vendor fog, and evolving definitions of what “high-dosage” means, then this book is the best tutor around. Sorry. Liz is a policy person, but the book feels like a school book.

No Adult Left Behind — Vlad Kogan

Kogan is one of the sharpest analysts of how schools really operate in terms of education politics (spoiler, adult interests often trump what might help kids as you might have inferred from the title). He’s an academic but he writes in English. And with a clarity you don’t often see in the space. Probably the most straight ahead book on education politics since Joe Williams. (Deep cut). Kogan breaks down the incentives that shape school governance, politics, and decision-making.

Leveled Reading, Leveled Lives — Timothy Shanahan

Reading is power. There is a reason that throughout history when someone wanted to control others they went after literacy. Down the street from where I live is the grave of a guy who was hunted by Confederates for years, and ultimately murdered, for teaching Black Americans to read up to and during the Civil War. It’s a sober reminder of why this matters. But as is our way in this sector, we’ve created Republican and Democratic ways to teach reading. We’ve ignored decades of research. We even argue sometimes about how important it is. As a result, we’ve sentenced millions of Americans to diminished lives. The Science of Reading is the latest, encouraging, effort to get that right. Shanahan lays out why the complaints about reading, and what kids are reading in schools are not a side show but must be a central education issue.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

More general books:

The Barn — Wright Thompson

Did you like Pappyland? This is not Pappyland. It’s a deep dive on the murder of Emmett Till from the same writer. The Barn includes a lot of new information and specifics that even if you’re familiar with this atrocity beyond the broad contours will probably be new to you. We wasted a lot of time and energy on flaky DEI books over the past decade, read a book like this instead.

John & Paul: A Love Story in Songs — Ian Leslie

My wife and I decided to see Ringo Starr and Paul McCartney in the same calendar year this year. We succeeded. I’m not an obsessive Beatles fan, but their genius and influence is undeniable. Leslie looks at Lennon and McCartney not as icons but as human beings in relationship with each other. It’s hard to think of a new angle on the Beatles, but he finds one: The songs they wrote to each other, that’s the conversation. So read this one for two reasons. First, it’s lovely. You might even find the room getting dusty at points. Second, anyone who has worked in close professional partnerships will learn from and reflect on the tale. A bonus? You learn the intimate history of some of the greatest songs in the songbook.

The Uncool — Cameron Crowe

I think two of the best books on 80s youth culture were Cameron Crowe’s Fast Times and Patricia Hersch’s A Tribe Apart. Here, Crowe tells his life story. Is this an unsparing take on things. Of course not, that was never Crowe’s thing. He partied with the bands. He wasn’t merciless. But it’s brain candy, a fun-well written read, with great stories, and some insights. This is for the music or movie lover in your life.

American Vikings — Martyn Whitlock

OK, for a guy who says I’m not a Viking guy I do recommend Viking books from time to time. A few years ago it was the fantastic The Long Ships. And I will say that seeing actual Viking ruins in Iceland fascinated me. This year for the beach I read American Vikings, a look at the evidence of Viking exploration in North America and how they show up today. The history of Vikings in North America turns out to be more interesting — and more contested and more present — than you might think on first glance.

Why Nothing Works  — Marc Dunkelman

The past few weeks have seen an upsurge in Dunkelman discourse. It’s an important book and argument. I suggested this book along with two others earlier this year as valuable markers of where we are and how we got here. Whether you agree in whole, part, or not at all, this is an important book and contribution to the discourse about how we go forward.

That Book Is Dangerous — Adam Szetela

Book banning is one of those issues that most people aren’t really against. They’re against banning of stuff they like, less concerned with stuff they don’t. Today’s conservatives are for free speech except around issues of race, gender, and so forth. Today’s left is against book banning and censorship except around some issues of gender, race, and so forth. Because it’s about power not first principles. Szetela looks at this in the context of publishing. It’s an echo of Diane Ravitch’s 2003 Language Police.

The Genius Myth — Helen Lewis

Helen Lewis is a fantastic writer on almost any topic. Here she looks at “genius” through a historical ens (you get a Beatles cameo here, too). What really makes what we think of as genius possible? And why can’t we accept what Lewis calls its, “random, unpredictable nature?”

I Wish Someone Had Told Me…  — Dana Perino.

I’m not a huge fan of self-help books, though I did recommend Mark Manson’s Subtle Art a few years ago. This one, though, might be good for a young person in your life. It’s pretty straightforward, you could read it on an airplane. It’s a lot of people’s take on how to be successful in work and life around some key issues as well as her experience. Given the randomness of social capital it’s not a bad primer for young people moving into professional life.

The 5 Types of Wealth — Sahil Bloom

OK, maybe I do read more self-help books than I think? This book isn’t about how money won’t make you happy – it’s about how it’s not the only thing that will and it’s not enough. Another quick read, and another good one for young people.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

I was at a gathering recently, and a Silicon Valley person who had transitioned into education was talking about how he approaches personnel decisions—basically using data: replacing lowest-performers each year. Essentially, the idea is that it’s a coin flip, but if your selection process is genuinely reliable, the odds will be in your favor.

A more traditional education person in the conversation had a host of questions—about support, counseling, and various other things.

The exchange was fascinating to watch because they were talking past each other and quite literally didn’t understand one another or what was being said. It was a real Mars–Venus culture clash.

We have to figure out how to talk the same language because we’re staring down a serious problem. The past few days have seen a flurry of articles from writers who are not traditional characters on the education beat. And they point up a culture clash that isn’t R and D, left or right—it’s more about who thinks we have a serious problem and who thinks the erosion of standards isn’t a big deal, or is acceptable in service of other goals.

What these three recent stories have in common is stark takes calling attention to an issue that doesn’t get enough attention: it’s not only poor, Black, or Hispanic students struggling in schools. Subpar learning is widespread.

Andrew Rice wrote about the situation in tony Montclair, New Jersey, for New York Magazine.

At The Argument Kelsey Piper dug into the UCSD math issue, which is hardly only a problem at UCSD or in California.

She followed it up with a look at what this is actually about and why, despite howls of protest from people who are OK with the status quo, no one is saying everyone will be an engineer, we’re talking about pretty low-level skills that can be universal. And what no one seems to be talking about is the skilled part of skilled trades, you have to be able to do math to be successful if you chose to do something besides college. Actually more. Technical jobs require more math than sociology.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

This is the kind of math we’re talking about at the 8th-grade level. If you’re not able to do this you’re going to struggle in the skilled trades or higher education.

Where does it all lead? Rose Horowitch dug into that for The Atlantic.

All three articles are worth reading, and all three point up a real problem whether you approach it from the vantage point of personal agency, freedom, and choice—or American competitiveness.

The only thing missing? Political traction to address it in too many places. As Tom Kane notes in the New York Magazine article:

What’s stunning is just how much professionals tolerate—and, in some cases, contribute to—obfuscation as a matter of course. We’ve discredited measurement, transparency, and the idea that performance matters, and we’ve baked it into the political price.

Perhaps that’s why political traction for such an obvious, and real, problem is so elusive?

*That’s a misquote. The actual statement from the damaged Apollo 13 was, “we’ve had a problem.” You can listen here.

Friday Fish Porn

Here’s Bellwether’s managing partner Rebecca Goldberg with a nice one in the Roaring Fork Valley of Colorado (from a few weeks ago when it was warmer, if you missed the context clues). Good time to point you toward Bellwether’s new strategic plan for the next several years, learn more here.

This picture is part of this one of a kind archive with hundreds of pictures of education types and their relatives with fish from rivers, lakes, and streams all over the world. Send me yours.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.